Right To Privacy Also Includes Spiritual Orientation: Madras HC Nullifies Its Previous Order That Prohibited 'Angapradakshinam' Ritual

The Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan observed, “If the right to privacy includes sexual and gender orientation, it certainly includes one's spiritual orientation also. It is open to a person to express this orientation in the manner he deems fit. Of course, it should not affect the rights and freedoms belonging to others. So long as this rubicon is not crossed, it is not open to the State or the Courts to impinge on one's action. I take judicial notice of the fact that many a devotee of Lord Muruga exhibits his piety by piercing small hooks on his tongue, lip or on the skin of one's back in fulfilment of vow. Likewise, devotees of Amman undertake fire-walk, carrying of pot of burning coal etc., These are inseparable features of Tamil religious culture…Article 19(1)(d) states that all citizens shall have the right to move freely throughout the territory of India. This right is subject only to the reasonable restrictions envisaged under Article 19(5). Right to move cannot be confined to walking or vehicular transportation. It would include Angapradakshinam also.”

Advocate G. Thalaimutharasu appeared for the Petitioner whereas Additional Government Pleader T. Vilavankothai appeared for the Respondents.

The Petitioner sought permission from the authorities to perform ‘Annadhanam’ (offering of food) and ‘Angapradakshinam’ (rolling over the plantain leaves left by the devotees after the ‘Annathanam’) rituals performed on the Samadhi Day of Sri Sadasiv Brahmendral. The Samadhi Day fell on May 18, 2024, this year and his formal representation did not elicit any response, hence the present writ petition.

The Court also nullified an earlier order passed in a writ petition praying for directions to the respondents to protect the right to dignified life by stopping the inhuman practice of rolling over on used plantain leaves left by brahmins after their meal, all over the State of Tamil Nadu was allowed. The Court said, "It is true that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in (2022) 1 SCC 209 (Amazon.com NV Investment v. Future Retail Limited) reiterated the well known proposition that no order bears the stamp of invalidity on its forehead and that it has to be set aside in regular court proceedings as being illegal. In this case, the petitioner has filed petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and it is in these proceedings the order dated 28.04.2015 made in WP(MD)No.7068 of 2015 has been declared as nullity. Just an executing court can declare the decree sought to be executed as nullity, I also have the jurisdiction to declare the order dated 28.04.2015 made in WP(MD)No.7068 of 2015 as nullity."

The Court, while dealing with the constitutional aspect of the case, held, “I take judicial notice of the fact that angapradakshinam (rolling on ground) is an established religious practice resorted to by the devotees. Appar one of the Nayanmars (a collective noun referring to the 63 saiva saints) completed the last leg of his journey to Kailash by rolling on ground. The question that arises in this case is whether a devotee can do angapradakshinam on leftovers on banana leaves after the devotees had eaten. It is a fact that such angapradakshinam is done by Ayyappa devotees. If it is done on the banks of river Pamba, it is called as Pamba Sadhi. Therefore, preventing the devotees of Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral from engaging in similar act of devotion would be a gross violation of the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”

The Court further opined that for conducting the customary religious events in villages, one does not require permission from the authorities and only if the festival organisers want to install sound amplifiers, permission will have to be sought. "Therefore, the question of the respondents granting permission does not arise at all. This issue has already been settled vide order dated 16.08.2022 in WP(MD)No.18554 of 2022. The organisers (R4) are at liberty to organise the events as traditionally done. The petitioner can very well exercise his fundamental right of performing Angapradakshinam on the banana leaves after the guests have partaken in the meals. No authority let alone the respondents can interfere with the same. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kaushal Kishore v. State of U.P (2023) 4 SCC 1 had held that certain fundamental rights can be invoked even against private individuals. Thus, no private individual can prevent the petitioner or any devotee from exercising his fundamental right. If there is any such obstruction, it is the duty of the police to aid the petitioner to exercise his fundamental right and remove the obstructors from the scene.”, the Court emphasised.

The Court also discussed whether the practice has any implication on public order, health or morality and if it contravenes any provision of Part III of the Constitution. The Court observed, “As regards the question of human dignity, I can only remark that in religious matters it is not open to third parties except in exceptional circumstances to make peremptory declaration as to what is dignified and what is not. There can be no a priori assumption. The standards set for determining whether a given ritual / practice is in consonance with the principles of constitutional morality are more rigorous than the standard set for determining whether such practice violates any of the individual provisions of Part III of the Constitution. The person making the assertion that the religious practice violates constitutional morality must discharge the burden.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the writ petition, restraining the respondents from interfering with the conduct of the Petitioner’s event.

Cause Title: P. Naveen Kumar v. The District Collector and Ors.

Appearances:

Petitioner: Advocate G. Thalaimutharasu

Respondents: Additional Government Pleader T. Vilavankothai, Advocates C. Christopher and A. Albert James.

Click here to read/download the Order